Shivani: Almost Nothing More Deranged Than a ‘Mother’ Like Nancy Salzman

OMG, shut up sultan… You are only saying that to rush to the defence of Kristin Kreuk. No rational person without an obsession for an actress believes such rubbish. Actors are given money they didn’t earn or make. It’s not a job. It’s not employment. It’s ridiculous excessive privilege, not wages. They are not working, middle or upper class. They have celebrity currency, given to them by tv/film studios. They are guaranteed a huge chunk of cash, even before filming begins. That’s not right. They are made what they are. And yes people can be self made. Actors are not. Businesses worth millions or even billions being built from scratch is beyond the realm of some bimbo receiving millions to play make believe. Actors don’t need to be given that much money, it’s what studios are willing to give them, based on the level of fame they have created for said actors. If the actor didn’t get given the role, the actor won’t be given millions. It’s not hard to understand if you get adequate blood flow to your brain. Useless morons the lot of them. And yourself.

Hurry up & join your bitch mother in the ground sultan. Actors themselves have admitted they receive too much, including Rachel Weisz and Hugh Hackman. It’s not based on earnings, it’s based on privilege. It’s excessive. There’s overpaid, then there’s that. Loser.

Stupid little sultan. Going on about capitalism. Even in communist China, they have been critiqued for the excessive money they give the actors. You don’t know anything. You just want to defend this bullshit because your dream spank Kristin Kreuk is a part of it. It’s not based on hours worked (it’s not even work), it’s not based on a pre set percentage of box office takings, it’s based on how much the corporations want to give the actors. Nothing more. Not capitalism, but corporations, spoilt brat actors with a need for attention and validation and the stupid fools who consume their bullshit. Cartels make millions off drugs because the losers of society take drugs to distract themselves from their bullshit life. That’s not capitalism, that’s consumerism where cunts profit and losers pay for it. That’s why there is capital. No excuse for corporations to give that much money to one individual. Without the camera man, there would be no footage. Without the writers, no story or script. Without the sound engineer, no sound. Actors receive way more than these people ever will, because that’s who corporations want to make privileged. Instead of that money being taxed to alleviate actual workers, the corporations keep it in the privileged club.

Johnny Depp has been receiving millions of dollars for films that have bombed at the box office. He still got a huge sum before filming and afterwards too. It’s because the jew studios want to give actors a lot of money. Go and look for yourself how much money actors received before and after a film bombed. Even if a film bombs, the actor profits excessively. The actor still gets a huge upfront chunk of doe before even doing anything. A lot of actors profit from tax payers. Like Kristin Kreuk at the CBC, British BBC and others. It’s not right, so shut the fuck up, you worthless little worm. It’s not based on what’s right, it’s based on what the corporations are willing to dish out, you dumb fuck.

It’s bullshit. Like you.

“But that is what the market pays because the chance of making ten times that much is often probable, and it’s only paid to a select few.”

Erm, no spastic. They don’t know how much a film will make, they don’t need to give a penny to some cunt actor before anything was even filmed as the actor literally has done nothing at this point, nor do they need to give them that much money after filming, no matter how much the film makes. It’s not set in stone, eg, 25%, 12%, 18% of all profits go to the actor. It’s what that studio CHOOSES to hand over to an individual, you dumb twat. It’s not based on profit made, but how much they CHOOSE to spoil them rotten beforehand, before the film has been made and before any capital is made. They could give them half, a quarter, an eighth. The word is excessive. They didn’t need to give Dwayne Johnson a million dollars to tweet about his shitty film, on top of the millions he was promised before filming a single shot. And saying a “select few” just makes them even more excessively privileged. The excessive amount of money they give them, before anything is even filmed is NOT capital as the film has not even been made, thus no capital has been made. Moron. That’s like an employer giving a huge bonus to a new employee, before he’s even started work, just in case he does a good job in the future. You lose.

“That is how the mass media system and capitalism works together.”

Wrong again retard. Even when no capital is made, as the film is yet to be made, they still give them a huge chunk of money. They are given a huge wad of cash before filming and wouldn’t have to give it back if filming stops halfway through. And they don’t distribute the capital made fairly. Actors are not top of the tree, but are treated as such. Instead of being taxed harder and/or that money being distributed to essential crew members, they stuff the pockets of actors, while a shit skin defends that bullshit on the internet. You lose.

You ignore every fact anyone tells you. Johnny Depp receiving millions BEFORE and after a bombed film and you still make bullshit excuses, because I am right. Comparing an actor to the founder of a billion dollar business shows what a dumb cunt you are. The actor has nothing in common with a billionaire CEO and business founder. You lose.

Once again, you moron, the word is EXCESSIVE. In China, there is a cap on how much the actor will receive because it’s so disgustingly excessive.

Whiny shit stained cunt. Worshiping a woman who wouldn’t piss on you if you were on fire and defending multi-millionaire actors who think you are shit. And what do you get out of it? You just become even more worthless.

Oh shit skin, you are thoroughly defeated. Just stop!

“No one said they “need” any money upfront.”

I said it cunt. And yet they are. A lot of it. That is privilege. They don’t need to be given that extra money before anything is done, but they are. Privilege. You lose. Again.

“That’s your statement as some sort of proof that actors don’t do work and that studios “make them privileged”.”

Yes studios make them privileged.

Once again, you fucking worthless foreign fuck, being given money BEFORE anything is even filmed, is not being paid for anything. Why can’t you get that through your shit skin turban and into your little pea brain?

Being given money, a lot of it, when NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE, is not earning that money. Get it cunt? That money was not earned.

Once the film has made its money, the slice of pie these cunts receive on top of the money they were already given is disproportionate and excessive. Excessive privilege given to them by the studios. Thus, studios make them privileged. You lose. Again.

You have lost this argument like all others.

“and it’s something you can’t do, so you have to shit on them and say they don’t work and they’re “privileged”. If it’s so fucking easy, why aren’t you doing it?”

Not everyone wants to be an actor you paki shit skin. Not everyone who does it is any good and no it’s not hard. It’s playing make belief.

“Of course the richest players get paid more for their quality of work. That’s how they fucking got their higher salaries and signing bonuses in the first place. They don’t have to be the top scorers every game, but you damn fucking better believe that they are getting that big check because most of the time they are really good at doing the things that are required of them due to their COLLECTIVE HISTORY, just like the actors who get paid large amounts of money are good at what they do and are a significant reason as to why people go to see their movies.”

Wrong paki boy. Connor McGregor is the highest “paid” UFC fighter despite his shit record and small number of fights in comparison to better skilled fighters. It’s not based on whose best.

Once again, you fucking worthless little cunt:

Giving actors a huge sum of money that was not earned, before anything has even been done, is not working for that money.

It is not an investment.

Then once the film or tv show is made, the money they receive on top of what they were given before anything was even done, is excessive.

You have lost spanky. Stop trying to justify excessive privilege. Stop trying to justify becoming millions richer without even doing anything to begin with, to supplement the huge amount they will receive on top of that.

Even years ago, the amount of money actors received was nothing like today, irregardless of box office takings or budget. They have been giving them more and more and a shit skinned, literally a shit skin defends this on the internet.

According to you, if you were going to make a film about your Kristin Kreuk stalking and spanking obsession and brought in an actress to play her, you would give the actress a huge chunk of money before anything is even filmed, instead of just a portion of the profits, which you would also give excessive amounts of. That is the point. Loser.

I hope Kristin Kreuk squats over your paki momma’s grave and squeezes out a stinky dookie. You would probably put the turd in a jar and build a shrine around it. Cunt.

Speaking like a child and shrugging things off that you don’t like is not winning. You lost the argument. That is why you resorted to that little gay outburst.

“Hope you enjoy prison, bitch.”

What does that even mean? If someone is right, then prison?

Hope you ‘enjoy’ the rest of your lonely, empty, womanless, childless, loveless, ‘life’, bitch.

“You saying I lost the argument doesn’t mean jack shit.”

Yes it does. When someone so much smarter then you, spanky, beats you in an argument and tells you, believe it.

—-

“You saying people getting paid up front makes them privileged doesn’t mean jack shit.”

Yes it does.

Once again (and again), it’s not getting paid upfront. It’s not a deposit, it’s not an investment and it’s not wages. It’s not revenue from profits. And it is an awful lot of money not earned. Money that could of been taxed or given to a good cause. It’s like a publishing company giving $1,000,000 to an author upfront, before the book is written and before a single book is sold. No need to give up that cash but they do it anyway. And then the profits not being distributed equally and fairly. Extremely privileged. Like stani’s living in a white country.

—-

“You repeating things over and over again as if you’re right doesn’t mean jack shit nor will it ever make you right.”

Yes it does.

—-

“You have nothing but the ability to put others down because you’re a loser yourself white trash.”

Re-read that. Your grammar is off. Also, thank you for pointing out my skill.

“What do you do for a living Bang-cunt?”

What’s a “Bang-cunt” and how does it differ from a regular cunt?

——

“Or do you consider being a whiny, bitching, anti-liberal and bigoted troll on websites a career choice?”

More of a pass time.

——-

“No one gets paid this kind of money up front unless the people who run the studios feel they’re worthy of it via their collective history.”

They are not worthy of it. If doctors, nurses, vets and road sweepers don’t get good coin, useless cunts like actors should not. That tells society that a shitty actor is of higher general value then a military member who saves lives. Studios probably do believe that. The actor does not even have to be that well known. Your dream spank Kristin Kreuk and Allison Mack are nobodies in the celebrity world, yet have been given millions. The bullshit argument that people pay to see actors is why they get so much money is wrong. Television is generally free. Yet the actor still can get a lot of money, even a not very well known one. Nobody is paying to watch television for free.

——

“It’s an investment in them based on what they’ve produced previously, for work they have to do.”

It’s not an investment. The film or television show will be made anyway. The excessive money they give actors has no correlation whatsoever with the box office takings or ratings once the film is made. It’s one thing to give an actor a small one off payment, but the inflated amount is wrong. Some actors take a huge inflated one off fee. Some take a smaller fee, if they can get some of the profits. Whatever the contract, it should not be inflated. Most millionaire actors are relatively unknown and people watch them for free on television. That negro Jussie Smollett is not very famous, yet was reportedly getting $60,000… an episode, when people could watch him for free. Ridiculous.

——

“They don’t just get paid and do nothing.”

They get an inflated amount of money for pretending. That is basically doing nothing.

—-

“and it is paid as a result of what they consider the actor’s market value, not because you believe in some conspiracy theory to “make them privileged”.”

They consider it acceptable to give an actor nobody has heard of a five digit sum to play pretend per episode, where people can watch them for free. It is not a conspiracy theory. They are not conspiring to make them privileged. They just are. They really do make them privileged. The argument is they give them too much. They over value them. It’s too much to give one person.

“Just because you call it “privileged” – which you have yet to define so you can’t even argue about it as the first rule of logical argumentation is the clear and unambiguous definition of terms prior to it – doesn’t make it so.”

Yes it does. Privilege is an advantage that only a small group of people have. Usually excessive and unearned. This can be a spoilt rich kid, a celebrity who gets millions of dollars to play pretend, even female focused divorce laws.

——

“Studios are for profit corporations. There is no such thing as a “good cause” in this argument.”

There doesn’t have to be. They should just stop making actors excessively wealthy, including c-list television actors who end up millionaires.

——-

“Their primary goal is to make as much money as possible.”

They don’t need to give Jussie Smollett $60,000 an episode to do that. What a joke. They don’t even fairly distribute the money to essential crew members.

——-

“And hiring qualified actors for whatever reason or goal they have who people want to see is a significant portion of this ability to do so.”

They don’t hire them because people demand to see an actor in a particular role. Viewers are not casting agents. It’s not down to viewers. People watch television for free. They, perhaps yourself too, watch a television show just when channel hopping.

The point is, they should cap the amount of money they give actors, even blockbuster Hollywood actors. China has put caps on the amount of money their actors receive because it was beyond a joke. The money actors receive, be it television or film, bit-part actor or A-lister, has been rising over the years. It was high before, ridiculous today. Read up on the tax payer money British BBC actors and presenters receive. 100% of the money comes from tax payers, who also have to pay a “TV licence”. It’s too much money to give to one person, for doing so little and it needs to stop.

“Your subjective evaluation of their worthiness is irrelevant. Their worth in monetary terms is determined by a free market.”

Free market or not, they give them too much. Communist China now puts caps on the money they give actors.

——-

“Doctors get pretty good pay. Regardless, you’re still talking as if the upper extremes are the average case and this repeated conflation has already been rendered null and void.”

Doctors are essential but actors are not. Doctors will never get the money actors receive. Pointing that out is not null and void.

——

“The average working actor gets paid 25-30K per year. That’s not “good coin”.”

We are not talking about the average actor. We are talking about those who receive excessive money.

—-

Average doctors get paid 150K per year. The best ones and usually the most sought after ones earn million(s) per year. It’s not as much as the $20+ million a select few actors get paid, but such doctors aren’t part of films that generate hundreds of millions or billions of dollars.

Pharmaceutical companies are worth billions. Doctors distribute pharmaceuticals. Doctors don’t get millions for doing so. If people hand over their money directly to the doctor for a health service, fine. Studios giving the actor millions is not.

——

“All it tells society is that some actors earn a lot of money. Only if money is valued above everything else in a society, i.e., it is already a materialistic one, would it reinforce such an assessment.”

Celebrities being given millions and putting them on a pedestal does tell society they are something special above everyone else. Nobody wants a Navy Seals’ autograph

——

“By the way, military members generally take away lives. They only save lives if they’re your soldiers.

Killing Taliban is good. Saving innocent people and fellow soldiers is good. There is stolen valour. There is no stolen ‘pretend to be a Hollywood cunt”.

—-

“They were paid what the producers and other decision makers of the show determined their value to the success of Smallville to be and how much success the show actually had.”

They over value. That is the point.

—

“Your subjective classification of them as “shitty actors” or “nobodies” in the industry is irrelevant.””

No it’s not. They are shit and not deserving of the excessive money. Far too much.

——

“It’s not an argument. It’s simply an obvious fact. Classifications to actor skill and popularity exist, e.g., an A-list actor.”

So? An actor can be hardly known but they still get more money then you. The actor could have 100,000 followers on social media, yet gets millions of dollars.

——

“What’s bullshit is your argument that the industry “makes them privileged” as if they’re just cardboard cutouts without talent and that’s why they get paid so much.”“

The industry does make them privileged. They give them a whole lotta money, beyond what they deserve. That is privilege. Many get protection from bad press, PR protection, put in five star hotels etc. Of course they are privileged and the studios do it.

——

–Television is generally free.

“No it’s not.”

Yes it is. You can watch television for free and actors on those shows can be multi millionaires, even if most have never heard of them. Not everyone has cable or very new streaming.

——

“There is no direct revenue for entertainment shown on “free” TV from the audience like there is for that which comes in the form of movies, cable television, or streaming providers, but entertainment is not free.”

Yet these same actors can be extremely wealthy, such as c-listers.

——

”Someone is paying for the content to be produced and remain on the air, and that is the producers making the investment and the advertisers who are paying for the commercial air time to sell their products. The latter price is directly proportional to viewership, which is determined by the demographics and the size of the audience.”

People are not paying to watch these people.

——

–It’s not an investment. The film or television show will be made anyway.

“Yes it is by definition:

investment – the investing of money or capital in order to gain profitable returns, as interest, income, or appreciation in value.”

Giving the actor millions of dollars is not an investment. Giving the camera man a fee is not an investment. When the studios give a production company a budget to actually make the film/show, that is the investment. When you (spanky), get your pay check, your employer is not investing in you to make profit. He is paying you for work done.

——

“Your subjective evaluation of it as not an investment is irrelevant.”

No it’s not.

——

–The excessive money they give actors has no correlation whatsoever with the box office takings or ratings once the film is made.

“Of course it doesn’t because such a classification is nonsensical. You can’t correlate money given to some future event that hasn’t happened yet. Movies are a gamble in the sense that there is an upfront cost like in any other business, i.e., an investment, the purpose of which is to make more money than what will be spent, and hence a profit. But this financial allocation is based on of the collective history of talent as has been already stated multiple times.”

The point is, it’s excessive. They could give them half, or a quarter of that upfront and the results will be the same. Over value. If enough people start speaking out against this and boycott their bullshit, hitting them in their pocket, things would change.

–It’s one thing to give an actor a small one off payment, but the inflated amount is wrong

“There is no ethical issue here. The studios are a for profit business in a free market. They assess the worth of actors to the probability of success of their content based on the the collective history of the actors and pay them accordingly.”

Give them less.

——

–Most millionaire actors are relatively unknown and people watch them for free on television.

“Most millionaire actors are few and far between, have been doing it a long time, are good at what they do and/or provide something that many people want, and have been part of hugely successful show(s) or film(s). They often start out doing lower income jobs, do small acting parts here and there, only to eventually get their big break, and they maintain their success.”

Being few and far between makes them more privileged. They don’t have to of been doing it for a long time, or be good at it and may not be the reason people watch. They still get far too much.

——

–That negro Jussie Smollett is not very famous, yet was reportedly getting $60,000… an episode, when people could watch him for free. Ridiculous.

“It’s irrelevant whether people can watch him for free, or he’s not that famous. That’s not only what determines how much he’s paid. I don’t know why you think this makes whatever case you think you have any stronger.”

Because giving someone mostly unknown, not even the main character, $60,000 an episode is beyond excessive. Most people won’t earn that a year. Studios must be made to put caps on these assholes. Hurt their pockets and they will have to change.

—-

–They get an inflated amount of money for pretending. That is basically doing nothing.

“If it was just “pretending” or “nothing” then everyone could do it. But most people can’t and don’t.”

It is just pretending. Most people don’t want to do it.

——-

–They really do make them privileged. The argument is they give them too much. They over value them. It’s too much to give one person.

”It doesn’t matter if you think they are overvalued. The free market determines their value.”

Studios do. And they over value them and they have been increasing their checks over the years. Government dictates how much civil servants earn. They determine taxes. If studios won’t do it, they should tax the fuck out of actors so they don’t get to keep all that coin.

—-

“Your rage is misdirected at actors – likely due to your anti-liberal views”

The word rage is excessive, like their pay checks. Conservative actors are just as overpaid. Nothing to do with politics. Though, when privileged leftie actors talk down to everyone, that makes it more insulting.

——-

“but they’re only getting what a free market pays them.”

Stop giving them that much.

——

“This argument is getting repetitive and it bores me now.”

Then stop. I and many others acknowledge that studios over pay celebrities. If the studios can afford to give up that much money, they can afford to pay way more tax. If studios won’t put caps on actor money, then government should tax them much more. They didn’t used to give them this much, but do now. It’s inflation.